Thursday, September 28, 2006

The Case For Impeachment.

A federal judge, the same one who ordered a halt to the illegal NSA wiretaps of American citizens, issued a ruling allowing one more week of illegal wiretaps, according to a Reuters news article.

But before you ponder the significance of this ruling, think about today's scheduled vote in the U.S. Senate on whether or not the U.S. will illegally rewrite the Geneva Conventions to allow torture of prisoners. David Corn posted some images on his blog today that put the importance of voting down the torture bill in perspective. The waterboards are the same kind used by Soviets, Viet Cong, and North Koreans.

I want you to look at the last image in particular, and commit it to memory. This is among the torture techniques the Bush regime has been using, and wants to continue using with impunity, on prisoners. The people having this horrible thing done to them, in which their heads are held under water to the point they begin to drown, were not captured on the battlefield. They have not been charged with any crime. Thay have not been given a fair trial, or access to attorneys, in most cases. And they are subjected to torture. Not to find any information that could prevent a terrorist attack. But because the torturers want to extract a "confession," regardless of whether or not it is true.

This is the nightmare we will find ourselves in if the torture bill passes the Senate. It already passed the House of Representatives, 253-168, with thirty-four Democrats siding against America by voting in favor and seven Republicans voting for America by voting against. That is 253 members of the House of Representatives, the vast majority of them Republicans, voting against their own country. Not even one of them should be allowed to hold onto their seats in November. For they have all chosen to stand with a treasonous regime that is hellbent on turning America into a dictatorship wherein the torture of uncharged prisoners is viewed as acceptable.

Now I want you to remember that ruling by judge Anna Diggs Taylor, that allows the Bush regime one more week to spy on American citizens without obtaining warrants, in violation of the law and the U.S. Constitution. The NSA wiretapping, authorized by the dictator, is an impeachable offense. But rather than hold the Shrub accountable, Congressional Republicans are rewarding him by letting him get away using torture against prisoners.

It does not matter, in the broader context of the moral debate, what these prisoners have been accused of. In America, because we lived under another king who convicted people based on nothing more than his word of crimes that were often trumped up, we wrote into our Constitution that the burden of proof must be placed on the government. The Founders of our nation had witnessed what happened to those who dared publicly criticize the English king. Often, they wound up in jail, or worse. To simply trust a corrupt and criminal government when it lodges an accusation against opponents is both foolish, and dangerous to the very foundations upon which this country was built.

I've spoken with some Democrats about impeachment should our party reclaim control of Congress in November. Some of them didn't warm to the idea, thinking it would do more harm to the country if we removed Bush and Cheney from office. But I am asking you, no, I am fucking TELLING you, to think about the irreparable harm that would befall America if after being voted back into power Democrats failed to stop a criminal dictator from committing even more crimes against America and the rest of humanity. History will judge any Democrat opposed to impeachment and removal from office of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney a coward, capitulating to a tyrannous regime that knows no regard for the rule of law. Worse, it sets the precedent that no one who calls himself president can be held accountable for proclaiming himself king, breaking the law, committing treason, and waging unprovoked wars against countries that did not attack or threaten us.

James Madison "thought it indispensable that some provision should be made for defending the Community agst. the incapacity, negligence or perfidy of the chief Magistrate (president).* The limitation of the period of his service, was not a sufficient security. He might lose his capacity after his appointment. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers. The case of the Executive Magistracy was very distinguishable, from that of the Legislature or of any other public body, holding offices of limited duration. It could not be presumed that all or even a majority of the members of an Assembly would either lose their capacity for discharging, or be bribed to betray, their trust. Besides the restraints of their personal integrity & honor, the difficulty of acting in concert for purposes of corruption was a security to the public. And if one or a few members only should be seduced, the soundness of the remaining members, would maintain the integrity and fidelity of the body. In the case of the Executive Magistracy which was to be administered by a single man, loss of capacity or corruption was more within the compass of probable events, and either of them might be fatal to the Republic."

And as Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence,

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

It is far more dangerous to allow George W. Bush, a court-appointed dictator, to remain in the office of the presidency which he usurped. To fail to investigate his regime's multitude of crimes, and to impeach and remove from office both Bush and Cheney, is to fail in our sacred duty to keep America free from tyranny. These vile, evil men want to be free to tap your phone at a whim, for no valid reason and with no oversight. They want to be free to kidnap you from your home or off the street, and spirit you away to a secret locastion to be tortured. They want to be free to detain you without charge, for as long as they want, without ever trying you for any crime. And in the event they do want to try you for a crime, they want to be free to convict you on the basis of trumped up or even fabricated evidence, that neither you or your attorney (if you're even allowed one) can see.

This is not America as it was, or as it should be. It is a different nation altogether. If true Americans are to reclaim their country from those who have perverted it for their own ends, we must hold them accountable. That cannot happen if we do not force those elected to represent us to hold the Bush regime accountable for its crimes. And future regimes coming to power will look back at any failure to do so as an excuse to carry out their own crimes.

Is that the future you, dear reader, want for America? Or do you want to take back the nation's soul and restore it to what it is supposed to be? In November, you have the opportunity to take back your country. You have the power to elect those who will stop the Bush regime cold, and excise that cancer from the heart of our nation.

History judges us every day, and it will judge us harshly if we fail to act.

*: (president) was added by me.

No comments: